Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Another Survey??? We Need Your Help

According to a reliable source, the folks at Bisno's Outreach are conducting another survey.

I would be greatly appreciated that if you receive a phone call and participate in the survey that you use ridiculous responses and send me an Email with the questions you are asked, so we know which "new" direction Bob and his bunch may be taking.

My Email address is

During a Los Angeles City Council meeting yesterday, I talked to an extremely reliable source concerning the Planning Departments struggles with comments generated for the Draft Environmental Impact Report and the responses to those comments by folks in the Bisno organization.

According to the source, the job of looking at all the comments and the responses to those comments made by members of the Bisno team, are not complete yet. This is the reason that the Planning Department has not been able to publish what it feels Bob can successfully build at the Ponte Vista site.

I think waiting patiently and not worrying about the comments and the responses to the comments will help all of us to better deal with whatever the Planning Department speculates on what could and/or should be built at Ponte Vista.

I still have no information as to whether Bob's personal house was sold at a foreclosure auction that was scheduled for April 29. If a reliable individual in the Outreach Team wishes to provide me with information, I would publish it. There are actually members of the Outreach Team that can be believed, some of the time.

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

A Victory Over a Weapon of Mass Development!

The following is an announcement and press release that signals a great victory over a developer and his small, but very harmful weapon of mass development.

Good afternoon--

Please find below this message and attached to this e-mail a press release with an update on the zoning designation of the site where McCowan's Market was located.

April 29, 2008 (213) 473-7015
(213) 500-9334 – mobile


LOS ANGELES, CA—The Los Angeles City Council today unanimously approved a request by Councilwoman Janice Hahn to preserve the single family neighborhood located near the former McCowan’s Market in San Pedro. McCowan’s Market was purchased recently by a developer. The developer closed down the long-time market and proposed building multiple units at the site, which is located in a single family neighborhood.

“McCowans Market was a piece of the community fabric of San Pedro and it’s a shame that it is gone,” said Councilwoman Hahn. “I agree with local residents that condos or apartments just does not fit with the character of the community.”

To address the concerns of the neighbors, Councilwoman Hahn called for the preservation of the neighborhood, asking the City of Los Angeles’ Planning Department to implement a “Q” Condition on the property. The condition would keep the owner from building anything except single family homes on each of the parcel where the market and its parking lot once stood. The Planning Department supported the “Q” Condition and on March 18 more than 200 people testified at the Harbor Area Planning Commission (HAPC) to support the recommendation. The HAPC voted 4-0 in favor. Today, the City Council approved the recommendation.

“I received more than 175 letters and 100 phone calls and e-mails supporting the “Q” condition,” said Councilwoman Hahn. “I did not receive one constituent request for greater density in this neighborhood."

It is quite true that stopping 18-23 condominiums from being built in an area of almost all single-family detached homes is nowhere as big as Bob's huge weapon of mass development.

What it might signal though, is a new found strength and determination by members of OUR community that we can use elected officials over greedy developers and members of OUR community can stand up for what they know is the best for OUR community.

Was this vote a possible warning to Bob? I don't really think so. What it does also show is that members of OUR community can work together to accomplish at least one task that may have been considered impossible by too many individuals, just a short time ago.

Bob has enough problems with Santa Ana, Baldwin Park, and especially here in the San Pedro area. Maybe he needs to rethink his goals for the developments he seeks to over develop. Maybe he needs to scale back all of his adventures in mass over development and find ways to work with current residents and lawmakers and not against the will of the people.

R Neighborhoods Are 1 considers the victory gained at the McCowan's redevelopment site as a good stepping stone to work even harder to make sure that the Ponte Vista development, whatever the people can make it, will be successful for all the residents in OUR community, especially the current ones.

Oh. I still have no information about the possible foreclosure sale that may or may not have happened today on Bob's house in Beverly Park.

Sunday, April 27, 2008

Rent To Own, and Other Funnies

I've been out of the picture concerning driving along Sepulveda at Arlington for the past several weeks, but I saw something interesting, just today.

The senior condos development, in front of the non-age restricted condo development where a prominent Ponte Vista Outreach Team member lives, has gone "Rent to Own."

It seems now that even seniors can rent one of the "condos", so that means they are more like apartments.

With so many other developments becoming lease-to-own or rent to own, how can Bob claim that all of the units he wants to build at Ponte Vista won't be lease to own or rent to own.

Bob has even found a supporter in Ms. Rachel Viramontes and her mother, who grace the back page of the current Random Lengths News.

It seems Ms. Viramontes states as fact that "Ponte Vista is good for seniors." Well, Ms. Viramontes must be contacted because she knows all about the future. Perhaps she knows who the next President of the United States will be.

Since Ms. Viramontes knows what Ponte Vista will be like, maybe she also knows the outcome of the lawsuit she filed, concerning the storm drain issue.

O.K., I'm being mean. We all know that no human alive today, or any human who has lived on this planet during any time in the prior 1-1/2 billion years, knows what is going to be at Ponte Vista.

But if we all believe that "Ponte Vista is good for seniors" or as another person stated, "Bob Bisno is going to save San Pedro" then I still have my acre of Moon that I haven't unloaded yet, and have I got a deal for you!

It's also good to read the fiction, now back with a full page spread in the Random Lengths News.

Again we get to read how Bob is going to fund the synchronization of traffic signals that will actually be completed before anything is built at Ponte Vista AND it is all being funded by us and not by Bob.

I am fairly pleased that the humor which is usually demonstrated by members of the Outreach Team at Ponte Vista, has not gone away.

April 29 is just two short days from today. If I remember correctly, that is the date Bob's personal house was set to be auctioned off at a sheriff's sale, because of a default on a loan.

I'm not holding my breath to see if the house actually is sold because I am fairly confident that Bob can get around just about any legal issue and come up smelling like the former ping-pong, oops, I mean table tennis champion he was.

Come on folks, where in the world can you find someone who wants to use a City government's right of eminent domain to condemn businesses and residences and then send out the notices only in English to a group of owners who are predominately Spanish speaking and reading?

It's a hoot, too, that this same fellow wants to build a very tall condominium tower in Santa Ana for upper-middle class residents who probably would not shop locally in that area because of the types of businesses there cater to a population that they serve quite well, already.

Now add to this, a person who tells all of us that he knows better what is good for us than we do, all the while not willing to live in the area he is attempting to change.

Come on folks, somebody out there has got a great novel in them just demanding to be written. The hard part is that probably nobody would believe any of it could possibly happen.

So, thank you Bob and the Ponte Vista Outreach Team. You have made my recovery more funny than you know. Please keep up your humor.

Friday, April 25, 2008

Odds and Ends 62

"A watched pot never boils."

Perhaps a certain developer is boiling because he most probably won't get what he wants and things may be moving much slower than he wishes.

Oh well.

Here is an article concerning Proposition R and term limits, suggested by a great member of the Rudderless Steering Committee of R Neighborhoods Are 1.

Please don't forget about R Neighborhoods Are 1. IF and when the Planning Department lets all of us know what they think Bob could build, we are ready, willing, and able to instantly comment on the Planning Department's beliefs and we're quite able to move forward.

Here is the article:

Prop R Legal Challenge-Community working together

Community Victory

Legal Briefs filed March 27, 2008
2nd Court of Appeal

It has been more than a one and a half years since our effort began and many are unaware or have forgotten that the battle continues on.

The Lobbyist doing business at LA City Hall (approx 200) formed a group titled Los Angeles Lobbyist and Public Affairs Assn. The group hired Sutton & Partners to lobby government officials on the industry’s behalf. The “Sutton” of the firm, is Attorney James Sutton.

In March of 2006 Attorney James Sutton formed “Citizens for Reform”; ID # 1284556 with James Sutton listed as the Treasurer. James Sutton wrote Measure R!

In July of 2006 Sutton changed “Citizens for Reform” to Committee to Reform LA-Yes on Prop R. They kept the same ID number. This was to be a Sponsored Committee and to add creditability he had the League of Women Voters and the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce sign on as Sponsors. The Treasurer was changed to Kaufman & Associates.

On July 14, 2006 City Council President Eric Garcetti sent a letter to the Los Angeles City Clerk Frank Martinez stating the LWV and the LAACC had sent him a request for a “proposed Ballot Initiative”.

On July 14th the City Clerk assigned a City Council File number to the request and gave it an official title. The city file number was 06-1800-S1 and the title was “Ethics Reform/Term Limit Extensions/Ballot Initiative”

This is what was sent to the LA City Council and what was adopted on July 18, 2006. The council voted on this file number item and had it placed on the November 2006 ballot.

In combining the Ethics Reform and extending the city council term limits from two four year terms to three four year terms, they violated the California Constitution.

The single issue rule was established to prevent elected officials and special interests groups from forcing the voters to vote for one issue in order to vote for another.

The argument presented by the City Attorney was that the Ballot title did not contain the word “imitative” and therefore did not have to comply with the single issue rule. The Superior Court Judge who had initially ruled Prop R was unconstitutional changed his ruling in light of the City Attorneys argument.

Our argument in the Court of Appeals is clear. The City does not have the right to violate the State Constitution by manipulation.

The success of this Legal Challenge is a direct result of the community of Los Angeles coming together and standing up against City Hall and the forces which until now operate with impunity.

Those who will celebrate in the final outcome will be Neighborhood Councils, Trade Unions, Media and Press ( LA Daily News, LA Times & LA Weekly, North Valley Reporter), Community Groups such as Valley Vote and Citizen Advocate Organizations such as US Term Limits and Judicial Watch. Thank you to some of our strongest supporters in the Animal Rights Community. You made all the difference in the world!

The Los Angeles Daily News must receive a Special Thank you for your reporting and humbling editorials. Thank You Ron Kaye.

The Community Blogers such as Mayor Sam and LA Observed were instrumental in getting the message out to the public. Michael Higby and Zuma Dogg, many thanks!

The two individuals who will be named as leaders in the effort will be David Hernandez and Ted Hayes, but many more individuals should receive well deserved credit.

Donna Connolly for one is to be recognized for her research which was vital in uncovering the truth about the origins of Prop R. Her writings which outlined many of her findings can be found at our web site.

Sandra Needs for her never ending support and encouragement.

The Web site created and maintained by Mr. Eric Ramos provided a central location where information could be found.

Our legal teams, Attorney Candice E. Jackson who agreed to take this on as a labor of love and allowed us to move forward on a promise.

Thank you Attorney Eric Grant and Attorney Anthony T. Caso who have taken up the fight and have provided us with the tools needed to achieve Victory.

Most of all, this is will be a victory for every man and women in Los Angeles who made it possible for us to get here.

From David Hernandez and Ted Hayes, we will see you in the Winners Circle.

For your reading 'pleasure', here is an article from LAWeekly about the pro-density law.

Angelenos Sue City Hall Over Prodensity "Affordable Housing" Pretense

Wednesday, April 23, 2008 - 4:59 pm

THE LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa have inadvertently united a patchwork of neighborhood groups stretching from the Valley to Venice, whose members have joined to stop city leaders from tossing out hard-won neighborhood zoning rules that keep a lid on ­overdevelopment.

The Council and mayor, saying they were complying with a state requirement to encourage more affordable housing, recently put on the books an ordinance that allows much bigger apartment complexes in areas whose residents believed they had won the battle against overconstruction.

“They broke the law, like usual,” says Robert Silverstein, a Pasadena attorney who opposes the so-called “density bonus” that waters down existing zoning.

In February, Villaraigosa signed the contro­versial ordinance to comply with Senate Bill 1818, a California law that gives developers permission to build far bigger apartment complexes and condos than are actually allowed on the land — if the developers include a smattering of “affordable” units.

But critics, including mayoral appointee and Los Angeles City Planning Commission President Jane Usher, openly questioned the legality of the Los Angeles ordinance — and now two lawsuits have been filed to stop it.

James O’Sullivan, president of the Miracle Mile Residential Association and an activist in the coalition, believes the ordinance will push L.A. over the edge into nonlivability: “The best business to own will be a U-Haul franchise.”

When the legislature passed Senate Bill 1818 in 2005, they hoped it would entice developers to include affordable housing in their projects. In exchange, developers would be allowed to reduce the number of parking spaces, exceed height limits — and pack in more units to reap higher profits.

But Los Angeles critics see the city’s interpretation as a “Trojan Horse” which all but prevents community debate over much bigger projects than are allowed by the zoning, letting developers erect ­inappropriately dense and tall luxury apartments and condos.

If the developer devotes just 11 percent of the building to “very-low-income units,” the building can blow past zoning rules — it can even be constructed right out to the sidewalk’s edge.

Buildings can be 35 percent bigger than is now allowed but with far less parking. Under the new ordinance, such projects are deemed “ministerial” — a technical designation that allows them to ignore California Environmental Quality laws.

In other words, there will be no environmental-impact review of proposed new construction under the new law.

In an e-mail obtained by Curbed LA — a blog about Los Angeles real estate — Planning Commission president Usher appeared to advocate that Angelenos sue City Hall. She questioned whether the ordinance “was fatally flawed” and whether it violates California environmental laws.

Usher did not return calls from the Weekly about her decision to publicly denounce an ordinance signed by the mayor, who appointed her to her commission post.

Doug Carstens, representing the coalition of community groups suing City Hall, points to California cities like Albany, Santa Cruz and Palos Verdes, which have implemented Senate Bill 1818 — but didn’t try to end-run environmental laws as did Los Angeles.

In L.A., under the new ordinance, “you could have projects built ‘by right’ and without recourse,” Carstens warns. In other words, there would not be any room for public opposition at the core of the traditional civic process.

In early April, attorney Noel Weiss made similar claims on behalf of homeowner Sandy Hubbard of Valley Village. Weiss calls the ordinance “one of the grossest examples of political malpractice and ineptitude I have witnessed. ... The City Council is being led around by the nose by [bureaucrats in the] planning department and the city attorney.

Councilman Tom LaBonge voted against the ordinance, saying developers could abuse it to demolish rather than build affordable housing. Says LaBonge, “It will ultimately take down Section 8 housing and could erase stabilized housing for some.”

Council president Eric Garcetti, an ardent advocate of much denser housing throughout Los Angeles, voted for it. Garcetti insists now, “We wanted to accomplish three things: provide more affordable housing; not take money out of the city’s pocketbooks; and protect neighborhoods from the wrong type of development.”

But critics say Garcetti and the City Council have achieved the opposite. Garcetti admits the ordinance is flawed. “I was trying to fix something that was broken,” he says. Now, he may support a “moratorium” on demolitions.

Whether he does or not, the downtown pols have managed to bring together disparate neighborhood groups that might never have collaborated on anything, but that are joining forces now — to stop City Hall.

Saturday, April 19, 2008

Something From Orange Juice Blog

Bob Bisno has a development called City Place in the City of Santa Ana.

It appears Mr. Art Pedroza is about as fond of Bob as I am.

Here is Mr. Pedroza's latest on City Place from the great blog at:

Welcome to City Place - I hope you survive the experience!

( Mr. Pedroza began with a photo of five heavly armed SWAT officers)

"I don't think this is what developer Robert Bisno had in mind when he plunked the overpriced City Place condos and townhomes over on Main St., across from Santa Ana's Mainplace Mall.

Just a few minutes ago, as I drove west on Memory Lane towards Main St., I passed an empty SAPD police cruiser with its flashers on. It was parked somewhat askew, on the right shoulder. I slowed down and lo and behold the lone officer was standing in front of his car with his gun drawn and pointed at a guy in a white t-shirt who was lying down on the grass in front of some apartments, by the look of it, located perhaps a block or two east of the City Place. He had his hands on his head, with his fingers interlaced. He looked like he was familiar with the process.

I could not believe it! What a sight to behold. I wonder what the yuppies on the way to their City Place townhomes thought about this as they drove by? Sure enough, three more police cruisers and a motorbike cop sped by me, as they drove east on Memory Lane to the incident, as I continued to Main St.

What the heck was Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido thinking when he asked Bisno to plop the City Place in Santa Ana? Keep in mind that the proposed Bisno 33 story luxury condo tower is supposed to go up right by where I saw the cop and his suspect today. And this neighborhood is supposed to be the GOOD part of Santa Ana!

Welcome to City Place. I hope you folks survive the experience!"

Friday, April 18, 2008

Odds and Ends 61

We wait.

Some wait with antici.................................................................................pation.

Yet still we wait to hear from the L.A. City Department of Planning and their take on what Bob could build at Ponte Vista.

We sit.
We wait.
We speculate.

The following was lifted from today's Daily Breeze and their article on Earth Day.

"Supporters of the Ponte Vista project in San Pedro will sponsor a series of community cleanup and tree-planting efforts in recognition of Earth Day.

The development will work with Clean San Pedro on Monday and Tuesday to clean up curbsides on Western Avenue from the Ponte Vista site to Palos Verdes Drive North on the north and First Street on the south.

More than a dozen trees will be provided by Ponte Vista for planting Wednesday at the Port of Los Angeles Charter High School.

The developer will present a green reusable grocery bag to the first 300 people who stop by the Ponte Vista site at Western and Green Hills Drive.

And on Friday, Ponte Vista will join in the "Green Carpet Reception" for the Los Angeles Harbor International Film Festival's "A Short Opening Night" at the Warner Grand Theatre."

Perhaps some folks were actually wishing Bob would clean up his blighted project site and remove the weeds, dirt, broken glass, and other trash continuing to pile up inside a fenced area that should have has tarps placed along the fences to lessen the offense that site causes residents and others driving along Western.

Do you think with all the 'goodness' Bob's Outreach Team is trying to do, anybody new might be added as supporters?

Thanks Bob for all you claim to be doing for Earth Day. But we would appreciate it more if you cleaned up the area of Earth that is called Ponte Vista at San Pedro, too.

Here is a perspective from Citywatch L.A.
By Ken Draper

Another Citizen Coalition takes City to Court

Want to sue the City? Take a number. Get in line. The number of citizen and citizen group litigants is ballooning.

Now comes the Environment AND Housing Coalition Los Angeles … a group of residential and homeowner associations, civic organizations and individual citizens … to challenge the City on the recently enacted LA version of the so-called Density Bonus Ordinance. They filed their paperwork this week. The EAHCLA says that they are “concerned no only about how the densification (ordinance) will affect the quality of life in Los Angeles, but also that the ordinance actually may result in a net loss of affordable housing.

Their suit charges that the City passed the new ordinance … which they say will significantly intensify development throughout the City, without the environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act.

EAHCLA also claims that the City’s ordinance went “far beyond” what State bill (SB1818) required, “allowing developers to increase the number of residential units, increase the size and scale of their projects and reduce otherwise required parking” … if the project includes some affordable housing.

Those conditions could actually allow a reduction in affordable housing, EAHCLA spokesman, Jim O’Sullivan, says. “For example,” O’Sullivan explains, “a project could involve the removal of 100 affordable rental units and (after the bonus) the construction of 150 new, high-end condominiums. Under the Densification Ordinance,” he continues, “the developer could get the density bonus by designating just eight of the 150 units as ‘affordable.” That would mean a loss of 92 critically needed affordable units.

The Coalition is represented by Chatten-Brown & Carstens. Partner Douglas Carstens says that his firm supports the creation of affordable housing, “but the need for such housing does not excuse the failure to conduct an environmental review.” Which, as noted earlier, the group believes is required by CEQA.

As we reported a few columns ago, a number of the City’s stakeholders have come to the conclusion that a law suit is a more effective why of getting heard at City Hall than the city-controlled advisory system provided by LA’s neighborhood council program.

Jay Handal, who chairs both the West LA Neighborhood Council and the Greater West LA Chamber of Commerce, went to court on behalf of a coalition of business and community organizations to stop the Mayor’s Pico/Olympic Traffic Plan. His claim also argued that the right to know … through an environmental study … that the new traffic fix wasn’t going to, in fact, generate more rotten air for the city. In particular, the neighborhoods along the traffic plan route. He believes it will and that the City has not completed its homework on the plan. The City has been forced to delay implementation of the Pico/Olympic plan until the legal action runs its course in the courts.

Meanwhile, there is another SB1818 law suit cooking in Studio City and, it appears, the Pico Union NC folks are looking for a way to join the litigation line.

Offering another perspective, Raphael Sonenshein …a Professor of Political Science at Cal State Fullerton and the Executive Director for the NC Review Commission … offered this caution on the surge to sue. To paraphrase, Sonenshein said that it is important to distinguish between suing because you’re being ignored or some vote didn’t go your way and suing because you believe some law has been violated.

In most cases, he said, using the democratic system is still the best choice of action.

My friend Keith Bright makes another point: Sometimes, he said, you sue government “because it refuses to listen. Sometimes, simply because they are wrong.

A City Hall veteran I know … and also a friend, whose name will not be included here … says that “if they would just smarten up and involve the public in the development of these things, they could avoid some of this litigation.”

“City Hall,” he says, “still defines leadership as being able to come up with solutions on your own.

“Some councils are weary of being patronized and just listened to …public comment style. They also want to be heard.

It seems safe to predict that as long as the public continues to believe that the politicians are playing them, or ignoring them, they will look for ways to raise the decibel level.

It also appears that as long as their representatives refuse to take action on their behalf, on issues like the Density Bonus Ordinance, the public will continue to generate its own leadership and take its own action.

Most of LA’s City Council believe that LA’s Density Bonus bill is wrong and that the State’s SB1818 is not now going to accomplish what it was designed to do. Yet, no one steps forward asking for repeal or modification.

Maybe LA’s stakeholders are maturing. Maybe they’re just stepping in to fill a leadership void.

Looks like there are a number or reasons to expect the surge-to-sue to continue to pick up momentum.

CityWatchVol 6 Issue 32
Pub: Apr 18, 2008

Saturday, April 12, 2008

Just Some Things on an Agenda

Someone was kind enough to send me the agenda for the upcoming meeting of the Board of Harbor Commissioners.

In looking over the agenda, several issues seems to raise my eyebrows, concerning security and possible terrorist threats that are still very close to the Ponte Vista at San Pedro site.

I hope Bob makes all of his potential buyers learn about the possible hazards of living in one of the areas where a high concentration of threats and possible problems could occur.

Of course, I am really think Bob and his Outreach Team will not reach out to notify potential buyers who don't already know of the many environmental and potential terrorist issues, so close to the site.

THURSDAY, APRIL 17, 2008, AT 8:30 A.M.

Homeland Security

Port Police


Odds and Ends 60

Sorry for being tardy with this post, but I was busy yesterday, after being "Paroled" from Torrance Medical Center and Transitional Care Unit, and "Parole Officer" Terri, kept me on a very short leash as far as the Internet goes.

I received a 'gift' from the Planning Department, that 'gift' being no real news to report from them about what they feel could and should be built at the Ponte Vista at San Pedro site.

In the future, but probably before build out of whatever is going to be built at Ponte Vista, the L.A. County Sanitation District's Clearwater Water program ( )will be well under consideration and study.

This program would be to construct a third tunnel and piping system for clean water to pass from the sewage treatment plant to the Pacific Ocean.

One of the largest debate items for the project is where the access shaft for the drilling equipment and other needs will be sunk and maintained for the duration (8 years) for the construction of the tunnel.

It may come to pass that all the entitlements needed to build whatever is going to be built at Ponte Vista will be granted and dealt with long before any traffic study for the Clearwater Program is conducted.

One concern that should probably become home in the very backs of our minds is that the Sanitation District owns the property where Eastview Park now sits on Westmont, near Western Avenue and behind All Pets.

If proponents and opponents to Bob's current plans for Ponte Vista wish to not have the shaft where Eastview Park is now located, then this is a point we all can join together on as we did with the large high school project that was planned for part of the Ponte Vista site.

Wednesday, April 02, 2008

Odds and Ends 59

Well, I had a particularly wonderful "holiday" yesterday on what is usually my day of most fun.

But it is time to get back to reality and the issues at hand.

The surgery I am having is a total hip replacement which is going to be done on Thursday. The first surgery on my right hip to remove dead bone and graft new bone tissue failed, so now I get the more frequently done operation.

There is still not much to report on the Ponte Vista at San Pedro project, but that may be a good thing. I am hoping that the Planning Department is going over the application and studies with a very fine tooth comb to insure that whatever they feel should be built on the site will actually be to the benefit of everyone in OUR community.

The Los Angeles County Sanitation District is considering building a third tunnel from the treatment plant just off the Harbor Freeway and out into the Pacific Ocean. is Web site you can learn more about the Clear Water Program.

If the determination is made to build the third tunnel, construction won't begin before 2012, but it will last eight years, perhaps.

If a new tunnel is built, there will need to be an open air shaft dug to place the tunnelling machine underground and provide access to the tunnel.

Eastview Park is a City of Rancho Palos Verdes park that is on land leased to the City by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District. Whether the large shaft will actually be dug on that location is one more issue to be carefully studied for any future building that may or may not occur.

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Odds and Ends 58.5

I am having surgery on my lip later this week, so I need to post an Odds and Ends now.

David Shinder, Bob's traffic engineer has issued a plan to have all the traffic within the project on one-way streets.

Mr. Shinder apparently believes that it would be best to have all traffic flowing in the same direction to allow for easier access to the gates along Western Avenue and Gaffey.

It appears that Bob has decided to plant Jacaranda trees along the streets inside Ponte Vista. it seems he loves the flowers on the trees and that the oily residue those leaves leave, will encourage residents to park in their assigned stalls, when the project is built.

It now seems that the commercial portion of the project will be built in the first phase of development and not in the last phase, as the Draft Environmental Impact Report states.

Having the new small store/eatery/laundry built with the first units will allow residents to learn to use them more than venturing out to nearby businesses, outside the project's perimeter.

Bob will build at least one-single-family house at Ponte Vista where he will live with his family after his house in Beverly Park North is auctioned off on April 29.

In fact, Bob's attorneys' have requested that permits to build the new house be granted ASAP.

Until such time a new house is built for Bob and his family, a new trailer or "manufactured house" will be placed near the existing offices on the site, where Bob and his family will live.

Some folks at the Planning Department are so frustrated with how things are going, information is beginning to leak out, like a sieve.

Already I have learned that the Planning Department will strongly suggest that the buildings at the project will:

Be various tones of the color yellow.

Have murals painted on each one of them depicting different areas of California.

Contain multi-colored window so that reflections coming off the units will provide a "rainbow of color" to passing motorists on Western and Gaffey.

Use waterfalls coming off the tallest buildings and flowing into streams sizable enough for fishing, to continue the positive patterns of nature within the development.

Use loudspeakers throughout the outdoor and indoor areas featuring subtle mood music which encourages residents to stay in their homes and not venture too far from the complex.

Offer the services of Green Hills Mortuary via a tunnel from the Memorial Park to the center of the Senior section of the project.

There are other "amenities" that I can't confirm at this point, so I won't list them here.

Just one more thing, though: